There is an interesting torts case out of Dallas where Judge Carl Ginsberg in the 193rd State District Court, ruled against Presley “Rhonda” Gridley, a self-described psychic who created a national frenzy by telling authorities that a Liberty County couple, Joe Bankston and Gena Charlton, had a mass grave on their property. She has been ordered to pay the couple $6.8 million.

As a psychic, Gridley, 50, did not appear to see this one coming. She did not appear for the bench trial where she was found to have committed defamation for giving false information to the police on June 6, 2011. The damages include $3 million in damages to Bankson and $3,849,000 to Charlton, plus five percent interest.

Gridley goes by the name “Angel” and called the Liberty County Sheriff’s Office and falsely claimed that 25 to 30 dismembered bodies were buried in a mass grave at the plaintiffs’ residence.

The case is interesting because statements to police are usually protected, though they can be prosecuted as false statements to the police. The police then repeated the false statements to various news outlets and created the firestorm. It is perfectly bizarre. The police hear from a psychic named Angel and run to the media to trigger a frenzy. What followed was an army of helicopters, cars, cadaver dogs, and police officers searching the property on the basis of this one “vision.”

Yet the original charge against the County were dismissed, leaving only Gridley. There is no record of any disciplinary action against the police for starting the media circus or taking such action on the word of someone who is obviously psychotic rather than psychic.

Gridley has said that this was just one of the many visions that she has had her whole life. She confirmed her visions, she said, with two friends who also had visions of children being in danger.

Something tells me that “Angel” is not only certifiably insane but judgment proof. Call it a vision.

“The damages include $3 million in damages to Bankson and $3,849,000 to Charlton, plus five percent interest.”

That is all very well but Gridley may not have the funds to pay.

I cannot believe that the authorities still allow these con artists to continue to ply their trade . It simply allows them to run a business extracting cash by deception out of the stupid, the desperate, the ignorant and the naive (and to cause problems as described in the article).

If there was the political will it would be fairly easy to get rid of most of these charlatans who are nothing but performers, actors and deceivers preying on the weak, stupid and vulnerable . It appears that for the most part, they get around limited trade practice and consumer laws by pretending they are simply officially providing “entertainment” when, of course in reality, nothing could be further from the truth.

I am sure, even now, they frequently step over the limited legal threshold in the way they ply their deceptive trade but there is no one calling them to account. In fact this story is indicative of just how stupidly taken in some elements in society are with these con artists.

I think Darren Smith described what should have happened just so very well. But when you add all the ignorant fools into the mix – and there is seemingly no shortage of them – this story is what we get.